In order to have "Jehovah" in the New World Translation, they must claim the Bible has been altered and corrupted. Like all cults, they destroy the reliability of the manuscripts of the Bible.

Here is what scholars have to say about a Hebrew original of Matthew: click here.

YHWH

"Yahweh"
(The Tetragrammaton)

Jehovah's Witnesses falsely claim that bibles remove YHWH (Tetragrammaton) from the Old Testament. The truth is, they have added the divine name in the New Testament where it is never found in the original Greek manuscripts, and blamed the Bible as being corrupted from the original where YHWH was once found. Rather than trashing their false doctrine, they trash the Bible!

Introduction:

The most obvious proof that Jehovah's Witnesses spell YHWH wrong as "Jehovah" is the fact that the letter "J" doesn't even exist in Hebrew, Greek, Latin. Further, the English language did not have a letter "J" before about 1500 AD. For example, the very first edition of the KJV printed in 1611 AD, contained no "J". Not even one! Instead the letter "I" is used for Jew, Jesus, Joshua, Joanna, John AND the person pronoun "I". Instead these words were written in 1611 AD as, Iew, Iesus, Ioshua, Ioanna, Iohn. In a stunning admission, Jehovah's witnesses tell us that the reason they continue to use "Jehovah" instead of the correct spelling Yahweh, is to be pleasing to man, not God.

One of the first things that JW new converts learn from their cultic Watchtower organization, is the lie that all Bibles are corrupt because they remove the Tetragrammaton from the Old Testament.

Most Jehovah's Witnesses are so dismally mis-informed about the matter that they have no idea how to even find the Tetragrammaton in the original Hebrew text of the Old Testament, much less even heard the term "Tetragrammaton".

What most JW's don't know is that they are the one's who are truly guilty of adding to the word of God because the New World Translation (the JW sectarian paraphrase they call a Bible), actually adds the word "Jehovah" in the New Testament 237 times where it is never found. So the hard cold fact is that the New World Translation adds "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times, where there is absolutely no ancient manuscript evidence of any kind to support it.

The Watchtower teaching of a Hebrew original of Matthew that used YHWH, surely trashes the Bible and destroys any confidence in the New Testament. If Jehovah's Witnesses can argue that YHWH was deleted from the Bible, then what else was deleted that we don't know about? Perhaps the word trinity was also used in Matthew 28:18-19, but it too was deleted!

A lost Hebrew Matthew that used YHWH contradicts Jesus Statement that scripture cannot be broken (John 10:35) and that the word of God is both incorruptible and imperishable. (1 Peter 1:23-25) For JW's to affirm that YHWH was once in the Bible, but deleted, is quite different from alternate readings. This is because there is absolutely no evidence in any Bible manuscript that YHWH was used ANYWHERE in the New Testament, much less Matthew. For YHWH to have been in the original, but 100% removed without any trace, destroys all credibility in the reliability of the entire Bible itself. Of course, Christians know that JW's add YHWH into their NWT strictly for theological reasons, but in doing so, trash the Bible!

The only scholars who JW's can quote as believing in a Hebrew Matthew, are themselves Bible trashers and modernists who entirely deny the inspiration of the Bible. No scholar who views the Bible as the unalterable and inspired word of God will ever believe in a Hebrew Matthew original. So the Watchtower organization is "in bed with" those who try to ultimately destroy anyone's faith in the Bible. But the Watchtower has a long history of doing just this. For example, in the "Should you believe in the Trinity" booklet, JW's reference several "scholars" who come right out and say, "Trinity was a pagan origin doctrine". But what the "door to door class" of Jehovah's Witnesses doesn't know, is that all the scholars who say trinity is pagan in that booklet are themselves Bible trashers who reject the virgin birth and the resurrection of Christ and the inspiration of the Bible. Click here for specifics on this.

So as we will see, the JW charge that the Bibles that Christian commonly use, removes the divine name from the Old Testament is false.

We accept that Hebrew was the language of the Jewish Synagogue in the first century. This fact, however only strengthens the fact that God did not want Christians to continue using YHWH since none of the 27 New Testament books ever used it.

Jehovah's Witnesses would have us believe that YHWH was removed 100% from the New Testament, but never removed once from the Old Testament manuscripts.

The truth is that JW's are guilty of adding the Divine name into the New Testament where it is never found.

The expression, "Jehovah's Witnesses" did not exist prior to it becoming a kind of corporate trademark name of the salesmen of the Watchtower book selling company after 1930 AD. For 2000 years the followers of Christ have called themselves "Christians", never "Yahweh's" or "Jehovah's Witnesses,".

I. The progressive use of God's name in the Bible:

El Shaddai

was God's prime name to the Patriarchs. YHWH was God's prime name to the Jews: "God spoke further to Moses and said to him, "I am YHWH; and I appeared to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, as God Almighty [El Shaddai], but byMy name, YHWH, I did not make Myself known to them." (Ex 6:2-3)

Jesus

is God's prime name for Christians: "And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved." (Acts 4:12)

Term

Before Moses

Moses to Cross

Cross till end

El Shaddai:
Ex 6:2-3

Used by Patriarchs

YHWH:
Ex 6:2-3

Never used by Patriarchs

Used 7000 times by Jews

Never used in NT

Jesus:
Acts 4:12

Never used in OT

Used 900 times in NT

II. YHWH not removed from the Old Testament of Bibles:

It is impossible to remove YHWH from the Old Testament, because it is found in every original Hebrew Manuscript. (However, YHWH is never found in any manuscript of the New Testament.)

The American Standard version and Young's Literal Translation, always uses Jehovah when the Tetragrammaton is found in the Hebrew.

Reputable Bibles like the King James version and the New American Standard version do not remove the divine name from the Old Testament.

The King James Version uses "Jehovah" many times: Ex 6:2; Ps 83:18; Isa 12:2; 26:4.

In the "Principles of Translation" section in the introduction of the New American Standard version, it says:

The Proper Name of God in the Old Testament:

In the Scriptures, the name of god is most significant and understandably so. It is inconceivable to think of spiritual matters without a proper designation for the Supreme Deity. Thus the most common name for the deity is God, a translation of the original Elohim. One of the titles for God is Lord, a translation of Adonai. There is yet another name for which is particularly assigned to God as His special or proper name, that is, the four letters YHWH (Exodus 3:14 and Isaiah 42:8). this name has not been pronounced by the Jews because of reverence for the great sacredness of the divine name. Therefore, it has been consistently translated Lord. The only exception to this translation of YHWH is when it occurs in immediate proximity to the word Lord, that is, Adonai. In that case it is regularly translated God in order to avoid confusion. It is known that for many years YHWH has been transliterated as Yahweh, however no complete certainty attaches to this pronunciation.

If we were given the choice, we would merely insert YHWH every time it is used in the Hebrew Old Testament. If that is what the Holy Spirit chose to use, it is good enough for us!

III. Jehovah's Witnesses Misspell YHWH!

"Jehovah" cannot be the name of God since neither Hebrew, Greek, Latin don't even have a letter "J" and English did not have the letter J before about 1500 AD?

The name Jesus, John, Joanna, Jew all started in the Greek with the letter "I", not J.

As the introduction to the New American Standard confirms, the proper way of spelling YHWH in the English language would be Yahweh, not Jehovah.

Dr. George Howard, who is quoted as proof that Matthew was written in Hebrew also said the proper pronunciation of YHWH was "YaHWeH" and that this is the accepted one by the vast majority of scholars.

Jehovah was popularized by a catholic monk who lived in the 12th century AD. In fact "Jehovah" was never used before this!

The form "Jehovah" results from reading the consonants of the Tetragrammaton with the vowels of the surrogate word Adonai.The dissemination of this form is usually traced to Petrus Galatinus, confessor to Pope Leo X, who in 1518 a.d. transliterated the four Hebrew letters with the Latin letters jhvh together with the vowels of Adonai, producing the artificial form "Jehovah." (This confused usage may, however, have begun as early as 1100 a.d.; note KB, 369). While the hybrid form Jehovah has met much resistance, and is universally regarded as an ungrammatical aberration, it nonetheless passed from Latin into English and other European languages and has been hallowed by usage in hymns and the ASV; it is used only a few times in KJV and not at all in RSV. (Anchor Bible Dictionary, YAHWEH)

Take a look at the obvious error of spelling it Jehovah as Jehovah's Witnesses demand it. We will not quibble with the three vowel guesses, but two of the four consonants are wrong! What a silly blind organization the Watchtower is.

Y

H

W

H

J

E

H

O

V

A

H

WRONG

GUESS

RIGHT

GUESS

WRONG

GUESS

RIGHT

Notice that the spelling Yahweh at least has all four consonants correct!

Y

H

W

H

Y

A

H

W

E

H

RIGHT

GUESS

RIGHT

RIGHT

GUESS

RIGHT

When you point this out to Jehovah's Witnesses, they hypocritically say "the spelling doesn't matter".

IV. Jehovah's Witnesses admit Jehovah is wrong:

In one of the most spectacular admissions in religious history, the JW's actually admit that Jehovah is wrong: "Yahweh . .. is admittedly superior to Jehovah. 'The wrong spelling Jehovah OCCURS since about 1100' and then it offers its arguments in favor of Yahweh as the correct and original pronunciation." Let Your Name Be Sanctified, Jehovah's Witnesses, p 16-20)

Even worse, they admit that the only reason they keep using it is to please men, not God: "While inclining to view the pronunciation "Yahweh" as the more correct way, we have retained the form "Jehovah" because of people's familiarity with it Since the 14th century. New World Translation, Jehovah's Witnesses, foreword p 25)

V. Jehovah's Witnesses add "Jehovah" into the New Testament!

The New World Translation adds "Jehovah" into the New Testament 237 times, where there is absolutely no ancient manuscript evidence of any kind to support it.

Even the Watchtower admits this to be true! "no ancient Greek manuscript that we possess today of the books from Matthew to Revelation contains God's name in full." (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, Watchtower booklet)

While the Hebrew Old Testament does contain YHWH many times, the Greek New Testament, NEVER uses the name of God YHWH. In words JW's would understand: "Jehovah is never found in the New Testament, but was added by the Watchtower society to support their false doctrine."

When you point this most significant fact out to Jehovah's Witnesses, they first think you are a liar. Then second, they thoughtfully twitch in stunned wonder as to how this could possibly be true. Then third, they run off to "the higher ranking" to learn that what Christians first told them is in fact true! Finally they are told the most bizarre lies by "the higher ranking".

After JW's have recovered from the initial shock that the Greek New Testament NEVER uses the word "Jehovah" (YHWH), the answer is even more shocking and disturbing, than the original news!

Jehovah's Witnesses actually teach that the gospel of Matthew was originally written in Hebrew and that this original Hebrew copy of Matthew (the one written by Matthew's own hand) did contain YHWH. Problem is, no one has ever found any evidence of a Hebrew Matthew original, and this still doesn't explain why the Jew world Translation add's Jehovah in the books Paul wrote.

VI. Rev 19:1-6 does not use YHWH, but YAH

The Fourfold "Hallelujah" of Rev 19:1-6 is used as proof that YHWH is used four times in the New Testament. The word means "praise to JAH" not Praise to YHWH. We repeat, the Tetragrammaton is NEVER used even once in the New Testament.

"Alleluia—Hebrew, "Praise ye Jah," or Jehovah: here first used in Revelation, whence Ellicott infers the Jews bear a prominent part in this thanksgiving. Jah is not a contraction of "Jehovah," as it sometimes occurs jointly with the latter. It means "He who Is": whereas Jehovah is "He who will be, is, and was." It implies God experienced as a present help; so that "Hallelujah," says Kimchi in Bengel, is found first in the Psalms on the destruction of the ungodly. "Hallelu-Jah" occurs four times in this passage." (Jamieson, R., Fausset, A. R., Fausset, A. R., Brown, D., & Brown, D)

In Isaiah 12:2 and Isaiah 26:4 both Jah and YHWH are used beside each other IN THE SAME VERSE. This proves that Jah is not a simple abbreviated/shorted form of YHWH.
"Behold, God is my salvation, I will trust and not be afraid; For the LORD [Jah YHWH], GOD is my strength and song, And He has become my salvation." Isaiah 12:2
"Trust in the LORD forever, For in GOD [Jah] the LORD [YHWH], we have an everlasting Rock." Isaiah 26:4

Those who use Rev 19:1 as an example of the divine name are left stumbling when they learn the following: It is Jah not YHWH and the Holy Spirit doesn't shorten psalm 146:1, but He quotes it Jah for Jah, not Jah for YHWH.

To summarize. The Holy Spirit used Hallelujah some 30 times in the Old Testament and Hallelujah is used only 4 times in New Testament. The word Jah, which is one of the conjunctive components of Hallelujah, is used twice beside YHWH (Jah HYWH).

Some argue that there are many shortened forms of YHWH in seen in the various Old Testament names of God's people like Yah, Yahu, Y'ho, and Yo. Suggested examples are: Isaiah (Heb. Yesha`yahu), Joel (Hebrew Yo'el), Joshua (Hebrew Y'hoshua`), and Abijah (Hebrew Aviyyah). It is suggested that these names each use a shortened form of YHWH. Isaiah uses Yahu, Joel uses Yo, Y'hoshua uses Y'ho, and Abijah uses Yah. They are all shortened forms of YHWH. The problem is exposed with Joshua. Ex 6:3 clearly says that Moses was the first one to hear YHWH. Yet, Joshua, who was 20 years old before he ever met Moses was supposedly named after YHWH? There is no record of his name being changed when he met Moses. Even Moses' mother was named "Jochebed" which is a compound word that some suggest derive from YHWH and glory: "Jehovah of Glory". All this before anyone on the planet had ever heard of God's name given to the Jews through Moses: YHWH at the burning bush when he was 80 years old. So down goes that theory! Of course, some suggest that since the Jews developed that annoying and anti-biblical tradition of not pronouncing the name of God, that this explains why the name was not used in the NT. So supposedly the Jews would name their kids after YHWH, "God's personal name", but never refer to God Himself as Jehovah. I can just hear it: "Now Jehovah, come home right after school, we have a soccer game and you know G-D tells you to obey your parents!"

All this is just silly and useless speculation. The Holy Spirit is the one who chose to never use YHWH in the New Testament. The suggestion that the Holy Spirit bowed to some anti-Biblical tradition of not using the divine name is just not worth consideration to serious Bible students!

VII. Hebrew original of the gospel of Matthew is a myth

Scholars reject that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew: click here.

The best and only argument JW's can come up with for inserting Jehovah into the New Testament is that the gospel of Matthew, unlike the other 26 books of the New Testament, was written in Hebrew.

Even if Matthew was written originally in Hebrew, it would still mean Jehovah's Witnesses change the other 26 New Testament books that were originally written in Greek. But with brazen deception they think if the Holy Spirit wrote one NT book in Hebrew that contained YHWH, this justifies changing the Holy Spirit's choice of not using YHWH, but LORD, in the other 26 books.

But the most important fact to note, is that Jehovah's Witnesses admit that the other 26 books of the New Testament were written in Greek where the Hebrew "YHWH" would not be used. It is one thing to falsely argue that Matthew was written in Hebrew, then later corrupted when translated into Greek by removing YHWH, but quite another to explain why YHWH is never found in the other 26 New Testament books. You see, Jehovah's Witnesses believe the entire New Testament has been corrupted.

Anyone who has studied the writings of the "Apostolic Fathers" knows that they are quite unreliable. It is most likely that they thought a Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew into Hebrew was the original. They were mistaken.

It is also possible that Matthew produced both a Hebrew and a Greek Original, except for the fact that we have no textual manuscript evidence in the way of ancient fragments to support a Hebrew original of Matthew. The fact remains that there is absolutely no evidence of a Hebrew Matthew.

There has never been found any copies of a Hebrew Matthew, all were written in Greek, just like the other 26 books.

In fact of the 5000 oldest manuscripts of the Bible NONE use YHWH in the New Testament. So JW's are found to be liars.

JW's argue that the text of the Bible as we have it is corrupted and that it did originally contain YHWH, at least in Matthew, but it was removed. This is entirely different than saying Bible's mistranslate the Greek underneath, because in this case, it is missing from the Greek.

If JWs can argue that YHWH was lost from the original, then Christians can argue the word "trinity" was originally used in the Bible, but lost. When JW's argue that Trinity is never used in the Bible, we can equally argue that YHWH was never used in the New Testament. Of course this kind of simple logic is too much for the average JW to comprehend and they will argue in one breath that YHWH was lost from the Greek, then in the other breath say it is adding to the word of God if someone insists the word trinity is found in the Bible. (note: Trinity was never used in the Bible, but the argument is used for hypothetical reasons only. Go to our trinity in the Bible section for more details.)

Isn't that convenient! They say that YHWH was originally in the Bible, but it was removed... but we have no evidence it was removed. They say Matthew was written in Hebrew... but there is no evidence it was written in Hebrew.

VIII. Statements by the "Church Fathers" do not prove a Hebrew Matthew:

Anyone who has studied the writings of the "Apostolic Fathers" knows that they are quite unreliable. It is most likely that they thought a Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew into Hebrew was the original. They were mistaken. It is also possible that Matthew produced both a Hebrew and a Greek Original, except for the fact that we have no textual manuscript evidence in the way of ancient fragments to support a Hebrew original of Matthew.

Scholars reject that the early church fathers provide evidence of a Hebrew original of Matthew: click here.

Papias (150-170 C.E.) Matthew composed the words in the Hebrew dialect, and each translated as he was able. (quoted by Eusebius Eccl. Hist. 3:39. Remember, this was quoted by Eusebius in 315 AD, 175 years after Papias died.)

Ireneus (170 C.E.) Matthew also issued a written Gospel among the Hebrews in their own dialect. (Irenaeus; Against Heresies 3:1)

Origen (c. 210 C.E.) The first [Gospel] is written according to Matthew, the same that was once a tax collector, but afterwards an emissary of Yeshua the Messiah, who having published it for the Jewish believers, wrote it in Hebrew. (quoted by Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 6:25 Remember, this was quoted by Eusebius in 315 AD, 100 years after Origen died.)

Eusebius (c. 315 C.E.) Matthew also, having first proclaimed the Gospel in Hebrew, when on the point of going also to the other nations, committed it to writing in his native tongue, and thus supplied the want of his presence to them by his writings. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:24)

Pantaenus... penetrated as far as India, where it is reported that he found the Gospel according to Matthew, which had been delivered before his arrival to some who had the knowledge of Messiah, to whom Bartholomew, one of the emissaries, as it is said, had proclaimed, and left them the writing of Matthew in Hebrew letters. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 5:10)

Epiphanius (370 C.E.) They [the Nazarenes] have the Gospel according to Matthew quite complete in Hebrew, for this Gospel is certainly still preserved among them as it was first written, in Hebrew letters. (Epiphanius; Panarion 29:9:4)

Jerome (382 C.E.) "Matthew, who is also Levi, and from a tax collector came to be an emissary first of all evangelists composed a Gospel of Messiah in Judea in the Hebrew language and letters, for the benefit of those of the circumcision who had believed, who translated it into Greek is not sufficiently ascertained. Furthermore, the Hebrew itself is preserved to this day in the library at Caesarea, which the martyr Pamphilus so diligently collected. I also was allowed by the Nazarenes who use this volume in the Syrian city of Borea to copy it. In which is to be remarked that, wherever the evangelist... makes use of the testimonies of the Old Scripture, he does not follow the authority of the seventy translators [the Greek Septuagint], but that of the Hebrew." (Lives of Illustrious Men 3)

"Pantaenus found that Bartholomew, one of the twelve emissaries, had there [India] preached the advent of our Lord Yeshua the Messiah according to the Gospel of Matthew, which was written in Hebrew letters, and which, on returning to Alexandria, he brought with him." (De Vir. 3:36)

Isho'dad (850 C.E.) His [Matthew's] book was in existence in Caesarea of Palestine, and everyone acknowledges that he wrote it with his hands in Hebrew...(Isho'dad Commentary on the Gospels)

Other "church fathers" have testified to the Semitic origin of at least one of Paul's epistles. These "church fathers" claim that Paul's Epistle to the Hebrews was translated into Greek from a Hebrew original, as the following quotes demonstrate: Clement of Alexandria (150 - 212 C.E.) In the work called Hypotyposes, to sum up the matter briefly he [Clement of Alexandria] has given us abridged accounts of all the canonical Scriptures,... the Epistle to the Hebrews he asserts was written by Paul, to the Hebrews, in the Hebrew tongue; but that it was carefully translated by Luke, and published among the Greeks. (Clement of Alexandria; Hypotyposes; referred to by Eusebius in Eccl. Hist. 6:14:2)

Eusebius (315 C.E.) For as Paul had addressed the Hebrews in the language of his country; some say that the evangelist Luke, others that Clement, translated the epistle. (Eusebius; Eccl. Hist. 3:38:2-3)

Jerome (382) "He (Paul) being a Hebrew wrote in Hebrew, that is, his own tongue and most fluently while things which were eloquently written in Hebrew were more eloquently turned into Greek (Lives of Illustrious Men, Book 5)

IV. Scholars reject a Hebrew original of Matthew:

Scholars reject that Matthew was originally written in Hebrew: click here.

The only scholars today that maintain a Hebrew Original of Matthew instead of a Greek original, are Bible Skeptics and Bible trashers. By this we mean, these men believe in the "Q Document" theory where each of the four gospel writers copied from each other and this Phantom "Q Document" for which there is no evidence of its existence.

The apostolic fathers who make reference to a Hebrew Matthew are simply not reliable witnesses as any one knows who has studied these uninspired writings.

Any early reference to a Hebrew Matthew my in fact be a Hebrew translation of the original Greek text of Matthew into Hebrew.

Professor George Howard: The Jehovah's Witnesses only scholar is quoted profusely as evidence of a Hebrew Original of Matthew. What JW's won't tell you is that George Howard is almost alone in the world today in his views which have been universally rejected because they are based upon speculation and guesses and no solid proof. Howard's theory has never found any support in any New Testament manuscript. Howard and JW's must both claim that the New Testament has been lost altered and corrupted as you will notice below.

Here is how Jehovah's Witnesses quote Howard:

"Thus, Professor George Howard, of the University of Georgia, U.S.A., made this comment: "When the Septuagint which the New Testament church used and quoted contained the Hebrew form of the divine name, the New Testament writers no doubt included the Tetragrammaton in their quotations." (Biblical Archaeology Review, March 1978, page 14)" (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, God's Name and the "New Testament", Watchtower publication, Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001)

"The same thing occurred in the "New Testament," or Christian Greek Scriptures. Professor George Howard goes on to say: "When the Hebrew form for the divine name was eliminated in favor of Greek substitutes in the Septuagint, it was eliminated also from the New Testament quotations of the Septuagint. ... Before long the divine name was lost to the Gentile church except insofar as it was reflected in the contracted surrogates or remembered by scholars." (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, God's Name and the "New Testament", Watchtower publication, Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001)

X. When Jews translated the Hebrew Old Testament in 250 BC, (the Septuagint, LXX) they did not retain YHWH in the Greek translation but changed the word to LORD [gr: kurios].

If there was a Hebrew original of Matthew (something we deny) and the Christians did not retain the name of God in the Greek translation, this could only be because they did not think it was important to do so.

It is self-defeating for Jehovah's Witnesses to attempt to prove the Septuagint originally contained YHWH in Hebrew embedded in Greek translated text of the Old Testament, by producing photographs of ancient fragments of the Septuagint that contain YHWH, because they cannot produce any producing photographs of ancient fragments of the New Testament that contain YHWH. All 5,000 manuscripts and fragments of the New Testament use LORD [kurios] not YHWH. So it matters not if some Jews inserted YHWH into the Greek LXX.

It might come as a shock to Jehovah's Witnesses that Jesus quoted often from the Septuagint (LXX) and so did the writers of the New Testament.

"Probably around the beginning of the second century C.E. an influential edition of the Hebrew Bible was published that eventually became the textus receptus of rabbinical Judaism and very successfully replaced competing editions. At the same time, rules and regulations were developed on how to deal with scribal errors concerning the name of God. This standard edition of the Hebrew Bible was then translated into Greek, resulting in the editions of Aquila, Theodotion, and Symmachus. Unlike their Christian colleagues, however, these Greek editors did not translate the tetragram; instead, they retained the Hebrew letters, thus demonstrating that they regarded the tetragram as an essential editorial element of the Hebrew original." (The first edition of the New Testament, David Trobisch, p 15, 2000)

XI. Hebrew manuscripts that use YHWH were translated from Greek!

JWs are deliberately confused by the watchtower organization into thinking we have Hebrew originals of the New Testament where YHWH (or some form of the Tetragrammaton) is used.

What they don't tell you is that these medieval translations date later than 1000 AD and were actually translated from Greek originals.

The average Jehovah's Witness is simply too poorly equipped to see the utter deception being played upon them by the Watchtower organization and just accept we actually have Hebrew manuscripts of New Testament books.

XII. JW's, like Mormons, think the Bible is corrupted!

Jehovah's Witnesses believe the New Testament has been so badly corrupted, that YHWH was actually removed by copyists. Of course, there is no evidence of this and the charge is false. But don't take our word for it, listen to the Watchtower organization yourself in their famed, "Aid to Bible Understanding"

"Why, then, is the name absent from the extant manuscripts of the Christian Greek Scriptures or the so called 'New Testament'? Evidently because by the time those extant copies were made (from the third century C.E. onward) the original text of the writings of the apostles and disciples had been altered. The divine name in the Tetragrammaton form was undoubtedly replaced with 'Kyrios' and 'Ho Theos' by later copyists." (Aid to Bible Understanding" p. 887, 1971)

"However, Jesus and his followers had prophesied that an apostasy would occur in the Christian congregation. The apostle Peter had written: "There will also be false teachers among you." These warnings were fulfilled. One result was that God's name was pushed into the background. It even got removed from copies and translations of the Bible! (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, Watchtower publication, Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001, p16)

Jehovah's Witnesses argue for the divine name in the New Testament based upon wishful thinking, driven by false doctrine and call into question the reliability of the text of the New Testament. After all, if the divine name was removed but we have no evidence of this.... what else was also removed that we have no evidence of?

A rather stunning observation Jehovah's Witnesses have simply missed, is that while they argue YHWH was removed from the New Testament, and we have no evidence of its use, the oldest Hebrew version of the Old Testament retains YHWH in all 7000 places. So the actual manuscript evidence for the divine name YHWH used in the Old Testament is 100% intact, but 100% corrupted for the New Testament. If such a conspiracy really existed to remove YHWH from the Bible, why would they only remove it from the New Testament manuscripts and not the Old? The answer is because Jehovah's Witnesses are false apostate teachers who trust the manuscripts of their Watchtower magazine more than the manuscripts of the Bible.

So in the end the Watchtower proves itself to love its own agenda of false doctrine so much, that it will question the accuracy of the original Greek manuscripts of the Bible before it will question itself!

So Jehovah's Witnesses are prepared to teach the Bible is corrupted, rather than change their doctrine!

XIII. The Holy Spirit replaced YHWH with LORD:

Even in the Old Testament, the Holy Spirit substituted the word "God" in place of YHWH. Look for the substitution by comparing Ps 14:2,4,6,7 and Ps 53:2,4,5,6.

Lets summarize: We know that YHWH was used many times in the Old Testament. We know that no known New Testament manuscript (over 5000) uses YHWH.

Jehovah's Witnesses agree that the other 26 books of the New Testament, apart from Matthew, were written in Greek.

So focussing on these 26 books written in Greek, we notice that most of these books quote passages from the Hebrew Old Testament that contain the Tetragrammaton (YHWH). Yet the Holy Spirit chose to replace YHWH with LORD (Greek: kyrios) in the New Testament.

YHWH reads the same in Hebrew and Greek, yet God DID NOT WANT to use it in the New Testament.

This is because YHWH was replaced by the name JESUS as per Acts 4:12.

So the practice of the New American Standard Bible replacing YHWH, has divine precedent!

XIV. Removing YHWH from the NT is not meaningless & confusing, as JW's charge:

Look at this outrageous statement made by Jehovah's Witnesses in their foremost booklet on the subject:

Jehovah's Witnesses write: "The LORD"—Equivalent of "Jehovah"? "To remove God's distinctive personal name from the Bible and substitute a title such as "Lord" or "God"" ... "makes the text weak and inadequate" ... "it can lead to meaningless combinations of words" ['The Lord is God' vs. 'Yahweh is God'] ... "can also lead to awkward phrases." Psalm 8:9 [O LORD our Lord vs. Jehovah, our Lord] ... "can also lead to confusion." Psalm 110:1 [THE LORD said unto my Lord vs. Jehovah said unto my Lord] (The Divine Name That Will Endure Forever, The LORD"—Equivalent of "Jehovah, Watchtower publication, Jehovah's Witnesses, 2001)

Jehovah's Witnesses really place themselves in a difficult position. They must either accuse God of using "meaningless combinations and awkward phrases that lead to confusion" in the New Testament (see Acts 2:34) or trash the manuscript reliability of the Bible as corrupted. Of course option three is they realize they are entirely wrong about their watchtower theology regarding YHWH.

The fact remains that these expressions are "meaningless combinations and awkward phrases that lead to confusion" only in the mind of JW's. We find absolutely nothing wrong with them.

XV Abbreviated words in the earliest manuscripts: "nomina sacra" give no proof of YHWH in the original:

Jehovah's Witnesses actually argue that the words "God" and "Lord" are abbreviated in the earliest manuscripts of the Greek New Testament prove that YHWH was once there, but it was removed.

Metzger (Text of the New Testament) mentions as included among the that were written in abbreviated form the Greek words for the following: Jesus, Christ, Son, God, Lord, Spirit, Savior, David, Cross, Mother, Father, Israel, Man, Jerusalem, Heaven.

The actual form was like this: Instead of writing "Jesus" they would write: "J-s", where the dash was above, rather than as we have shown it in the middle.

It was an abbreviation, not a substitution or replacement of one word for another.

The Jehovah's Witness argument, therefore is invalid, because there is no substitution, but merely abbreviation.

XVI Questions for Jehovah's Witnesses to answer:

How can "Jehovah" be the name of God since neither Hebrew, Greek, Latin don't even have a letter "J" and English did not have the letter J before about 1500 AD?

If the name Jehovah is so important, then why is it never used in the entire Greek New Testament? If men edited out the name of God, "YHWH" when they copied the New Testament, as only the Watchtower organization claims, then how can we have any confidence in any of the New Testament? Should we discard the New Testament or the Watchtower organization as unreliable?

Lets accept, for the sake of argument, that Matthew was written originally in Hebrew. (It was not written in Hebrew but Greek, but this is for argument take only.) How does a Hebrew original Matthew justify your "adding to and changing the word of God" in the other 26 New Testament books that were originally written in Greek where there is no evidence YHWH was ever used?

If the name "Jehovah" is so important, then why does Acts 4:12 say, "There is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name [v10 Jesus Christ] under heaven that has been given among men, by which we must be saved"? Would this not have been the logical place for God to have used the name "YHWH"?

What is the correct spelling of God's proper name "Yahweh" or "Jehovah"? If Jehovah's Witnesses maintain that "Yahweh" is more proper, why do they misspell it "Jehovah"? If the name of God is so important, then should you not only pronounce it correctly, but spell it correctly too? Is not spelling more important than pronunciation?

The NWT translates the Greek word "kyrios" as "Jehovah" more than 25 times in the New Testament (Mt 3:3, Lk 2:9, Jn 1:23, Acts 21:14, Rom 12:19, Col 1:10, 1Thess 5:2, 1Pet 1:25, Rev 4:8, etc.). Why is the word "Jehovah" translated when it does not appear in the Greek text? Why is the NWT not consistent in translating kyrios (kurion) as "Jehovah" in Rom 10:9, 1Cor 12:3, Phil 2:11, 2Thess 2:1, and Rev 22:21 (see Gr-Engl Interlinear)?

In Lk 4:12, the NWT translates "kyrios" (Gr-lord) as "Jehovah", which makes the verse read "... 'You shall not put Jehovah your God to the test.'" See Gr-Engl Interlinear. Why is kyrios translated as "Jehovah" in this verse? Was the devil, in Lk 4:9-11, putting Jehovah to the test or JESUS to the test?

In Phil 2:9, the NWT inserts the word "other", even though it doesn't appear in the original Greek (see Gr-Engl Interlinear). What is the reason for inserting this word? Is the word "Jehovah" a name? See Ex 6:3, Ps 83:18, and Isa 42:8. How would the verse read if the word "other" had not been inserted? What does scripture say about adding words to the Bible? See Prov 30:5-6.

Why are you called, "Jehovah's Witnesses" and not "Christians"? Since Jehovah's Witnesses appeal to Isa 43:12; 44:8 for scriptural support that they should be called, "Jehovah's Witnesses" then what was the "new name" prophesied in Isa 62:2? Can't be "Jehovah's Witnesses", for God already used it 20 chapters earlier. Could the new name be "Christian" after our savior "Christ"?

Why would the name God gave to His people not be "Christians" since Acts 11:26 says, "The disciples were first called Christians in Antioch"? Why is the name "Jehovah's Witness" found nowhere in the New Testament, if that is God's divine name for His people under the new covenant? Why would God wait almost 2000 years to suddenly start using the name "Jehovah's Witness". Does this mean that first century Christians were not known as Jehovah's Witnesses"?

Conclusion:

While Jehovah's Witnesses charge that Bibles remove the divine name this is false. These Bible's do not remove the divine name, they substitute LORD (all caps) to signify YHWH. As we have seen, these Bibles actually follow the divine example in substituting LORD for YHWH.

The New World translation actually changes, alters and adds to the text of the New Testament by adding JEHOVAH where it was never found in the Greek originals.

Hence Jehovah's Witnesses will have the plagues of Revelation added to them because they added to the word of God.

To justify this addition, Jehovah's Witnesses are taught that the Bible is lost altered and corrupted so badly, that YHWH was removed from the New Testament by men.

Jehovah's Witnesses are therefore a dangerous cult and stand beside Mormons in teaching that the Bible is corrupted and unreliable.